Обсуждение: Is there an equivalent of the W3c HTML checker for SQL?
This may seem like a question unrelated to Postgresql, but I have recently noticed a project that is having a discussion about how their code should be developed. They are (unfortunately) developing first with MySQL, because that is what they are familiar with (I assume), but that inevitably leads to have to backfit changes when they later come to support other DBs (like Postgresql). The W3C checker gives a quick check to catch as many as possible of the browser dependancies, so that they can be avoided during the development cycle rather than after it. I was wondering if something similar exists in the SQL world. It would be great if I could persuade them to move to Postgresql as their development platform, but that is unlikely. Such a checker would mean that support of other DBs would be much easier rather than being a big effort. If it makes life easier, this project is a Java one, using JDBC. David
Hi, I've just stumbled across the Mimer SQL Validator (commercial product): http://developer.mimer.com/validator/ Not that I know it... Anyway, there are different things (like PHP scripts or stored procedures and such), which do a whole lot of other logic and/or processing which influences the queries they finally make. So I think such SQL checkers are not that useful. Might be just MHO, though. Regards Markus
David Goodenough <david.goodenough@btconnect.com> writes: > This may seem like a question unrelated to Postgresql, but I have recently > noticed a project that is having a discussion about how their code should > be developed. They are (unfortunately) developing first with MySQL, because > that is what they are familiar with (I assume), but that inevitably leads > to have to backfit changes when they later come to support other DBs (like > Postgresql). The best advice would be to test against both DBs continuously during development. Of course this requires that the developers buy into the idea that cross-database portability is worth some work ... it sounds like they have not yet figured out that MySQL is not the universe :-( regards, tom lane